Since you fail to see that many of the men that were drafted were not put in a combat arms unit and did not serve on the front lines but still had the same problems of drug use, alcoholism and dereliction of duty then I guess you can go on pounding your chest. See I was making the comparison with the entire military no matter what compacity they served in, you were the one that took it to the extreme to single it out to just those in a combat arms role. Being a supply clerk stationed in Hawaii working basically a normal work day is in no way risking your life any more than community service. But since you seem to think that comparison doesn't work I will try something a little closer to your understanding.

Since the discussion was about Obama first wanting to "require" community service and your statement below would cause one to believe that if it were required (which we now know the wording was changed to show that that is not the case) you would be for it.

Community service is not compensated so the volunteer is giving of his/her time for free. Community service projects are done on community properties, the same properties that states, cities, municipalities and villages are responsible for and they normally have a staff of workers that would be paid to do these task.

Now for the comparison, by you agreeing (the statement above) that you see nothing wrong with requiring it then it should be safe to say that you would have no problem donating your time to cleaning rest area restrooms once a week. They are properties that fit into the catagories above and controlled by the state.

This of course you wouldn't be paid for and you would have to do it when you were normally doing other things such as resting, showering or playing on the internet. Students that were required to perform community service would be obligated to work it around any and all of there other activties, school, homework, work, extra cirricular activities and any responsibilities they may have around their household. Now as a parent I feel my children have enough obligations with other groups and clubs (these organizations like 4H, church youth group, Girls Scouts and Boy Scouts do plenty of things that contribute to the community) and need time to be a child. If other parents don't get their children involved in some of these organizations this should in no way make it the Governments place to start forcing these free services on anyone.

Even if for some reason you would actually agree with the crapper cleaning duty then I would have to ask, "Where does it end?". What "community service" duties do you feel are out of bounds or do you feel it should only pertain to students? If so, that is a rather convenient stance when you are not a student. I know you will try to say community service is not the same as cleaning rest area restrooms but community service does include cleaning of public restrooms. So the only argument you could use is a student (8 to 9 hours a day school plus time spent doing all other activities) vs. you the hard working man (who can only work at most 70 hours in 8 days which comes to 8.75 hours a day).

 

I see no problem with people naturally wanting to give back to their community, but I also respect the people who don't want to since they pay taxes to their community for the community to hire workers to do those tasks.

But parenting, or lack there of, is no way comparable to forcing people to do community work that they already pay taxes into for the up keep of their community. They are two, totally different issues.

 

dobry4u,

Sorry I didn't post this in my last reply but at first I didn't understand what you were getting at when you added the spots in my original post in purple lettering. I still am not quite for sure what you are stating but I think you are trying to say that there is an obligation to parenting the same as if Obama had required community service. I do understand that there are laws out there that are aimed at preventing child abuse and neglect. The difference is, if you do not want to take on the responsibility of parenting the easiest solution is to not have children. If Obama would have carried through with requiring community service you would not have the same possibility to opt out.

 

Colts Fan said:

So, if parents compel their children to volunteer, is it still considered volunteering?

Well, as someone mentioned, there is the draft. So, you are wrong. Also, the draft was not "outlawed" it was discontinued when we drew down our force strenth in Vietnam. (And to answer someone's earlier statement, Clinton reduced the numbers in our military for the same reason when the cold war ended.)

My earlier post was simply to show that, as in the Militia Act, there is a PRECEDENT for "required" military service by CIVILIANS in this country. One that was PROMOTED by our forefathers.

Furthermore, as to the "pride" factor. Ask any Israeli youth. They are required to spend a few years in the service of their small country, or they would HAVE no country to serve. And, because of their intense national pride, there is almost NO objection.

I believe, if anyone would look at the entire proposal before picking it apart, you will find options for civilian "armed" services OR peace corps type services... and both are tied to grants for education.

There are other examples in American history as well. How about the "Homestead Act?" Land was given away by the government, but people were REQUIRED to show development on it.

Unemployment payments REQUIRE that you make an effort (and document it) to look for work.

The draft COULD have been reinstated at any time by Pres Bush.... and SHOULD have since he wants to fight the entire Muslim world, but wasn't because he was trying to protect his legacy! Yeah.... how did THAT work out?

And for whoever said that the voluntary military was meeting it's recruitment goals.... you aren't reading the same news reports I'VE been reading for several years now. But, I don't have time to find them for you.

It wouldn't surprise me ONE BIT if a Democratic President ONCE AGAIN had to authorize the draft to fight the wars the Republicans want to get us into, nor RAISE taxes to pay for them! You guys have a real sweet deal going! You screw up the country, then blame US when we have to fix it!

 

Again, an apples to oranges comparison.

That would be incorrect. Obama has stated all along on his campaign website that such community service would be "encouraged". The change on his transitional website (the change.gov website) was altered to reflect what his campaign website stated. But even if it were required, yes - I would be in support of such an act.

You would once again be incorrect. Both his campaign website and his transition website both clearly state that tax breaks will be offered for those who give their time.

Are you sure about that? Community service goes far beyond what you are describing, and only includes such things on a limited basis; usually to convicts. In fact, many of the activities that our youth are already involved in (such as 4H, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts) are considered "community service". You may become better informed by doing a simple Google search on the subject. Simple things such as visiting the elderly are considered community service, yet such things have no direct connection to government property.

 

Jesus this thread got out of hand. :zzz:

 

Actually, I believe the Rev. to have concluded on the mark quite nicely :bigclap:

 

Well, dont look at me. I didnt vote for him.

 

I was thinking a GOLF CLAP more in line .